Plans of and Brief Architectural Notes on Kent Churches - Part II

12?Atlfe$COmbe. VccdcaXum unknown ' i J L > t i -t r- |T(u5 iyind/3U),in ifaap&Ce., \isuu onmctxc remaining. JTftc jws'mon o/otHcr oiwnlttgs. Hxr6fe73C>7?x». PLATE I. PLANS 6 and 6. pp. 15, 16. ( 15 ) PLANS OF, AND BRIEF ARCHITECTURAL NOTES ON, KENT CHURCHES. PART II. MAPLESCOMBE, ST. NICHOLAS HARBLEDOWN (NORMAN HOSPITAL CHURCH), ST. BARTHOLOMEW CHATHAM, ST. BOTOLPH RUXLEY, ST. NICHOLAS PLUMSTEAD. BY F. 0. ELLISTON-ERWOOD, F.S.A. THE RUINED CHURCH OF MAPLESOOMBE (Plan 5). THE dedication of this now ruined church, hidden away in a dry vaUey on the northern slope of the North Downs, is unknown. It is a great pity that these ruins were not less known, for they have suffered considerable damage in recent years from the discovery of the place by speculative builders, by the depredations of the worst sort of visitor and by the vulgar practices of a section of the cheaper press in its so caUed " treasure hunts " which brought hordes of irresponsibles into the district, to its hreparable damage. This is aU the more to be regretted because the building under consideration (Plan No. 5) though smaU and fragmentary, is of major interest. It is an example, rare in Kent, of the single ceUed apsidal church, having no structural division (chancel arch) between nave and altar, and thus no distinct chancel.1 Further there is no ashlar in its construction, the material being entirely local flint, though here and there were once to be seen pieces of Roman brick. The only remaining window, high up in the gable and thus weU above the sub-human destructive level, shows how understanding the builders were in the use of this intractable material, and the N.W. coin is a notable example of the skilful use of the more tabular forms of this stone. SimUar careful craftsmanship can be seen wherever any original waU surface remains, notably in the curve of the apse. There were no datable architectural detaUs remaining even when I first saw the church in 1906, and gaps in the waU were, as I have indicated in my plan, the only clue to the position of openings. There was a little contemporary plastering within and without, but the floor level was completely destroyed. The interior dimensions were 54 feet long and 22 feet 3 inches wide and its date is probably late 11th century. For comparison I give a plan of THE HOSPITAL CHURCH OF ST. NICHOLAS, HARBLEDOWN (Plan 6) I hope later on to give a fuU account of this most interesting building, but meanwhile I have extracted from the more detailed 1 Pairweather. Aisleless Apsidal Churches, 1933, p. 10. 16 NOTES ON KENT CHURCHES plan, the Norman portion which shows a structure of exactly the same type as Maplescombe, but slightly smaUer. The original west door is preserved, but only the starting of the curve of the apse north and south. There is however sufficient to be certain of its original dimensions. The date o f this church is probably late 11th or very early 12th century. THE HOSPITAL CHUROH OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW, CHATHAM (Plan 7) WhUe on the subject of Hospital Chapels, the plan of this church which I exhibited to the Society when it visited the buUding in 1947 may be of interest. The whole of the fabric has been drasticaUy restored but in spite of that, many notable features survive. The plan caUs for some comment: it is an apsidal church belonging to the " three ceUed " type,1 the church at Eynesford dealt with in the first part of this paper being another of the same class. At Chatham, however, there is an unusual feature in the addition, which appears to be contemporary, of a sort of transeptal structure of somewhat massive buUd, evidently intended for two altars. The north aisle and its arcade are modern. The windows on the south side of the nave have flat lintels of oaken boards and this would seem to imply the existence of the subsidiary buUdings of the hospital on this side, which the presence of old waUs beneath the dense mass of ivy seems to confirm. The point is that these three windows would be above the roof line of any pentise hke buUding on this side, and to obviate the necessity for extra height to take the arched window heads, flat wooden lintels were substituted. There is a peculiar recess at the east end of this south waU Which may have been devised to house a further altar, but on the other hand it may have been a means of communication with any buildings on this side. An unusual sedUe in the south respond of the arch of triumph is not entirely convincing but may be of 13th cent. date. In the corner of the modern vestry is a 12th cent, pillar piscina found during the restorations. The plan of the church has considerable bearing on the matter of date. Popular opinion ascribes the foundation to Gundulf (as is so much other work in Rochester) but it may be doubted whether such a plan was possible in his time and a documentary reference to Hugh of Trottescliffe " monachus noster " (afterwards, 1124, Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury) as the founder and builder, puts the date in the first quarter of the 12th cent, a much more likely one than the period 1076-1108, the dates of Gundulf's episcopacy.' Though the hospital is actually in Chatham, aU its associations lie with Rochester, being erected, as were so many simUar foundations, just without the gates of the city, in this case the East Gate. 1 Fairweather, op. cit.", p. 15. ^ HT^AA AM Sc&Qof fectC • • • w ^21 O I O W H S » Q €l937 rnmsmMmmmmmm Tfve HosnitaT of PLATE n . PLAN 7. p. 16. 18 NOTES ON KENT CHURCHES THE RUINED CHURCH OF ST. BOTOLPH, RUXLEY (Plan 8) Though Ruxley gave its name to a Kentish Hundred and though the important famUy of Rokesle was closely associated with it, this ruined church is late in date and insignificant in size. There was an earher church, but it seems to have disappeared and left no trace. It may have stood (it probably did) near to the present buUding and the Manor House, but no trace of Norman material has been recorded and the architectural history of the place does not commence tiU near & BtffolfiH, KuxWtJ. KenX. (xiii - xiv cailo cle&*U«a VbcW hiockeA fcmcLrf HocJui umxdcw eatcvt Uockttl deer . nj? ik* untuLnit mullunu ore wmWcfumt eUtttvued cmdn'ifcx jz-z-rxpt d*A*vyzd • i w i . i . i Scale IO do' Inmn-EcC ^HtVeaLoffure^ntCfuxictvOgoj). PLAN 10. the church remained tiU 1945 when one of Hitler's rockets wrecked the whole structure. Only the Tower, the perpendicular arcade and the Norman window survive. The future form of the church is not yet decided, nor is it possible to say whether the 13th cent, transept can be restored. . The church possesses three bells cast m 1686 by Christopher Hodson of St. Mary Cray, a fourth cast in 1790 in Whitechapel. The vicar says that the rocket which destroyed the church smashed the beU frames. He believes the bells are intact, except that one was cracked years ago.